Eagles ran a fake walkthrough to fool Patriots

[DaveThePanther2008]

4 minutes ago, Johnny Rockets said:

I hate to even start this debate but can I ask what rules the Pats supposedly broke in their first 3 SBs to be considered cheating? I am not doubting they knew signals, had video tapes, etc. but I have yet to understand what rule they broke. They were just better than the rest of the league at doing something. 

I am not an expert on the rules pertaining to spying on other teams but I believe video recording is against the rules.

Don't you find it odd that the league would destroy tapes before other owners and the competion committee members would get a chance to review it.

Also find it terribly odd that the guy that turned those tapes in is also deceased.

Had to protect the league.  I have no doubt that those tapes would have set football back like the Black Sox scandel did in 1919.

[PhillyB]

rivera wouldn't have thought of this 

[Mr. Scot]

23 minutes ago, Johnny Rockets said:

I hate to even start this debate but can I ask what rules the Pats supposedly broke in their first 3 SBs to be considered cheating? I am not doubting they knew signals, had video tapes, etc. but I have yet to understand what rule they broke. They were just better than the rest of the league at doing something. 

I'll ask what I've asked before. If you're really "just better" than everybody else, then why do you have to resort to something like this?

[Butterflyj30]

I love it!! You have to scam and scammer 

[Johnny Rockets]

19 minutes ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

I am not an expert on the rules pertaining to spying on other teams but I believe video recording is against the rules.

Don't you find it odd that the league would destroy tapes before other owners and the competion committee members would get a chance to review it.

Also find it terribly odd that the guy that turned those tapes in is also deceased.

Had to protect the league.  I have no doubt that those tapes would have set football back like the Black Sox scandel did in 1919.

Fair enough. Like I said, I hate to even start the debate but up until 2006 there were no rules against videotaping, stealing signals, or what they (and other teams were doing). It simply wasn't cheating. Shitty thing to do, but not cheating. They decided to still do it (although differently with presumed loopholes) after the 2006 memo that was sent out and that's when the league stepped in. 

And yes, destroying the tapes was a stupid thing to do but their videotaping, stealing signals, etc. was within the rules so I can't think of anything there was to hide other than their own embarrassment.  I blame the NFL for not having something in place to stop teams from using that advantage, not the Patriots for taking advantage of it better than other teams. 

[Johnny Rockets]

14 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'll ask what I've asked before. If you're really "just better" than everybody else, then why do you have to resort to something like this?

Competitive advantage. Do everything and anything within the rules to win. Try harder and be better than everyone else in all aspects of the game. 

I'm sure they have moved on to other things to gain an advantage these days. As long as it's within the rules, hard to knock them for that. 

Just my opinion and I know it won't be popular because the Pats are the evil empire and if you aren't a Pats fan, they should be hated. 

[Mr. Scot]

2 minutes ago, Johnny Rockets said:

Competitive advantage. Do everything and anything within the rules to win. Try harder and be better than everyone else in all aspects of the game. 

I'm sure they have moved on to other things to gain an advantage these days. As long as it's within the rules, hard to knock them for that. 

Just my opinion and I know it won't be popular because the Pats are the evil empire and if you aren't a Pats fan, they should be hated. 

Is electronic interference with opponents audio equipment just a matter of "competitive advantage"?

[ericr0319]

15 minutes ago, Johnny Rockets said:

Fair enough. Like I said, I hate to even start the debate but up until 2006 there were no rules against videotaping, stealing signals, or what they (and other teams were doing). It simply wasn't cheating. Shitty thing to do, but not cheating. They decided to still do it (although differently with presumed loopholes) after the 2006 memo that was sent out and that's when the league stepped in. 

And yes, destroying the tapes was a stupid thing to do but their videotaping, stealing signals, etc. was within the rules so I can't think of anything there was to hide other than their own embarrassment.  I blame the NFL for not having something in place to stop teams from using that advantage, not the Patriots for taking advantage of it better than other teams. 

dont quote me on this - but i believe it had something to do with the way they were videotaping. something about not being able to video tape from a certain distance. so lets say all other 31 teams were videotaping team practices. they were doing it from row 1 instead of row 12. 

again, i am not sure on this, but it is what i was told before lol

[ericr0319]

and at the end of the team anyone who thinks the Pats won a single super bowl because they cheat is a moron. pats didnt cheat to beat us. 

[Johnny Rockets]

2 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Is electronic interference with opponents audio equipment just a matter of "competitive advantage"?

I have seen audio equipment "malfunctions" in many games. Don't remember that being an issue in the Pats first 3 SB wins though. 

[Mr. Scot]

3 minutes ago, Johnny Rockets said:

I have seen audio equipment "malfunctions" in many games. Don't remember that being an issue in the Pats first 3 SB wins though. 

Hasn't happened in the Super Bowl because the Super Bowl didn't happen in Gillette Stadium.

It has happened in playoff games at Gillette, but "malfunctions" had a tendency to magically stop when a league official came to check on it but suddenly pick up again when they weren't around, especially at critical points in the game.

Coincidence, right?

[Darvinsun]

So where did this prove that the Patriots cheated...no where they still almost beat the eagles as in every Superbowl they play in.

[DaveThePanther2008]

14 minutes ago, ericr0319 said:

and at the end of the team anyone who thinks the Pats won a single super bowl because they cheat is a moron. pats didnt cheat to beat us. 

Explain why we had 15 yds of offense int the first quarter and than set a Super Bowl record with most yards in a Quarter after half time?  

I'll tell you why, they had ever play that we walked through.  It wasn't until Dan Henning changed the game plan after halftime.

If you think they flat out just beat us you are blind to the facts.

Their first SB against the Greatest Show On Turf.  They shut them down for most of the game.  Coincidence, I THINK NOT!!!!!

Anyone who thinks they didn't cheat IS A MORON....

Good God look at the facts.  Hard to argue when you make adjustments.  Something Shula never could do.

[Mr. Scot]

20 minutes ago, ericr0319 said:

and at the end of the team anyone who thinks the Pats won a single super bowl because they cheat is a moron. pats didnt cheat to beat us. 

Oh, I'm sure they're as pure as the driven snow